(Newser)
–
If your outlook on Social Security is a dismal one, the government's latest revelation will only add to your gloom: The trust funds that feed Social Security will be exhausted in 2033, a full three years earlier than the last government estimate. Medicare is still set to die in 2024, thanks to a 2% cut helped that program's fund hold steady, reports the AP. If the funds run dry, payroll taxes will only foot part of the bill: about 75% of Social Security benefits and 87% of Medicare costs.

What's accelerating the race toward insolvency? According to the programs' trustees, a few things: a rapidly aging, Baby Boomer-filled population and the weak economy, for one. Lower payroll tax receipts for another, brought on by suppressed wages thanks to high energy prices and the expectation that even when the economy improves, people will work fewer hours than projected. And then there are politicians. The trustees pointed a big finger at lawmakers' reluctance to act, and urged them to "not delay" when it comes to addressing the financial challenges the programs face.

I memeber a few years back...the Gubment shut down for a week and the theivin rats stayed home and got paid anyways.....and America ran itself with out them....they proved they are a worthless burden to us....you know who to vote for....thats all that matters....

Moon

Apr 24, 2012 5:02 PM CDT

It's not "running dry" - sheesh. What an sensationalist headline. From the ACTUAL report: Thereafter, tax income would be sufficient to pay only about three-quarters of scheduled benefits through 2086. Read for yourself: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/index.html A big part of this was because of the payroll tax holiday over the last two years.

truesoy

Apr 24, 2012 4:28 PM CDT

...and the 'lets go ahead and give Social Security to the banks' idea continues with new scare tactics: Social security will be exhausted in 2033!, 3 years earlier than estimated!!!! Go, run to the banks, they'll save it1. really, but aren't these the same banks government had to bail out just a few years ago?. Oh, it is because of the 'baby boomers, really?; well, the baby boomers is just a temporary condition, eventually they'll die, and then what?. However, there is a better solution, have the government instead pay Social Security back the over '$2 trillion dollars it has taken from the fund for other government projects. We are paying the chinese the trillions we owed them, why not then pay us back ?. Furthermore an increase in contributions to the plan could also be part of the solution. Social Security is a very successful program that is a victim of its own success; if it was not, the banks wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. But they want it, boy do they want it. Just imagine the 'bonuses'. And please, don't buy into the "Chilean" success 'Social Security privatization story', because it is not, and I will tell you why. In Chile the government guarantees the solvency of the plan, so while the banks rake in the profits, if anything goes wrong, as in the last financial crisis, the government then has to pay. Yes sir, a veru successful system......for the banks. Ps.- the people that had chosen to remain on SS fare better than those who didn't. And how about Medicare, why should it be insolvent? there is no legitimate reason for that. Medicare is an 'health insurance plan' into which we pay monthly premiums throughout our working life, 40 to 50 years, so at age 65 we could receive medical benefits for the 10 to 15 years of our lives on average. Just think about it. What other insurance plan would have you pay for so many years before you can use it?, none. Just imagine your employer telling you that you could use your Blue Cross only after paying the premiums for 40 years, crazy, ain't? But then, we do it for Medicare, and it is good. But now republicans want to 'privatize it' to 'save it'. Really?. No. They are not trying to save it because if that was the case they would instead raise the premiums a little more, just like any other insurance plan does. What we have here instead is an 'engineered lie' for the sole purpose of perpetrating a 'mass transfer of government funds to the insurance industry' . Again, just imagine the bonuses. No wonder Ceo's are drooling over the prospects of unlimited money. Republican Congressman Paul Ryan is the biggest proponent of this 'privatization' movement, but he is not alone, there are other republicans too. They are trying hard to 'sell us' the idea, but why?. One thing there has to be something in it for then, because they wouldn't be trying to screw us for free. That is for sure. Sincerely, Truesoy